How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
Harish-Chandra induction and restriction for finite general linear groups
Definition
Levi decompositions. Let be a finite group and let be a subgroup that is the internal semidirect product of a subgroup and a normal subgroup with and (Subgroup, Normal subgroup: invariance under conjugation); one calls a parabolic subgroup with Levi complement and unipotent radical when arises this way from the finite general linear group below. The projection is a surjective group homomorphism with kernel : it is the composite of the quotient map of The quotient group and coset product with the inverse of the isomorphism , , which is bijective because and (First isomorphism theorem for groups: ); hence .
Inflation. Let be a commutative ring and let be an -linear -module (An -linear action of on a left -module, and a -module over ). The inflation of from to is the -module together with the -action which is well defined because is a homomorphism, and under which every element of acts as the identity; we write for this -linear -module.
Harish-Chandra induction. With as above, the Harish-Chandra induction of from to (with respect to the parabolic ) is the -linear -module the induction from to of The induced -linear -module as -covariant functions on ; thus is the set of functions with for all , , and .
Harish-Chandra restriction. Let be an -linear -module. Its -invariants are an -submodule of that is stable under . Define the Harish-Chandra restriction of from to (with respect to ) to be equipped with the -action the restriction of the -action. This is well defined as an action of , and it depends only on the class of in : if has , then with and for . We write for this -linear -module.
Functoriality. If is a morphism of -linear -modules, then is also -linear for the inflated actions, and postcomposition with defines a morphism of -linear -modules, because ; the assignments and are additive functors between the categories of -linear -modules and -linear -modules, and acts on morphisms by restriction since the action of is -linear by An -linear action of on a left -module, and a -module over .
The case of finite general linear groups. Now let , let be a prime power and put , with diagonal torus and standard flag (Standard subgroups of finite general linear groups). For a composition of the standard parabolic subgroup has the Levi decomposition (Compositions, partial flags, and standard parabolics, Block Levi decomposition of standard parabolics), so the constructions above apply with , , ; we write More generally, a subgroup of is a split Levi subgroup when it is of the form for some and composition , and a split parabolic subgroup is a subgroup of the form ; such a subgroup has the Levi decomposition , and the general construction above attaches to it the functors and for . For an arbitrary split parabolic the definitions therefore involve no further choice: the parabolic subgroup and its unipotent radical are part of the data, and the notation , records only the Levi. For complex modules and coordinate parabolics obtained by ordering the same coordinate blocks, the parabolic-independence theorem of this page proves that these functors depend, up to natural isomorphism, only on . Over a general coefficient ring , the parabolic remains part of the functor data; when needed we display it as and .
Standing conventions. Except where another coefficient ring is named, all modules on this page are complex vector spaces, so , the group algebras are semisimple by Maschke's theorem for finite groups over fields whose characteristic does not divide , and the functors above are the complex Harish-Chandra functors of Dudas–Michel. For finite-dimensional one has , because an induced module is free over the index of in (the functions of The induced -linear -module as -covariant functions on are determined by their values on a set of left coset representatives), and .
Depends on
- Maschke's theorem for finite groups over fields whose characteristic does not divide $|G|$
- Block Levi decomposition of standard parabolics
- Compositions, partial flags, and standard parabolics
- The induced $R$-linear $G$-module $\operatorname{Ind}_H^G W$ as $H$-covariant functions on $G$
- Left group actions, transitive actions, and faithful actions
- An $R$-linear action of $G$ on a left $R$-module, and a $G$-module over $R$
- Standard subgroups of finite general linear groups
- Subgroup
- Normal subgroup: invariance under conjugation
- The quotient group $G/N$ and coset product $(gN)(hN)=ghN$
- First isomorphism theorem for groups: $G/\ker f\cong\operatorname{im}f$
Used by
- Cuspidal representations and Harish-Chandra series Definition
- Ordered partitions and coordinate parabolics Definition
- GL₁ and the trivial parabolic endpoints Example
- Parabolic induction of the trivial module as flag functions Example
- Finite-group invariants are exact when the group order is invertible Lemma
- Existence and uniqueness of cuspidal support Theorem
- Harish-Chandra induction is left adjoint to restriction Theorem
- Parabolic Mackey formula for finite GLₙ Theorem
- Transitivity and parabolic independence of Harish-Chandra induction Theorem
Dependency tree · two levels
43 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- Olivier Dudas and Jean Michel, Lectures on Finite Reductive Groups and Their Representations - Definition 9.2 and Remark 9.3, printed p. 35 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Jay Taylor, Finite Reductive Groups - Definition 5.2, printed p. 42 (standard reference, not scraped)